In a blow to Aereo, the Supreme Court today voted 6 to 3 that the service violates the Copyright Act, effectively killing the two-year-old service.

"Aereo is not simply an equipment provider," the court determined.

Aereo manufactures small HDTV antennas, receives broadcast channels, and then stores the programming they capture on servers. From there, people access the service on the Internet to view the content, without having to buy or install any equipment.

In 2012, however, many of the big networks including Twentieth Century Fox, Univision, PBS, ABC, NBCUniversal, and Fox Television sued Aereo for copyright infringement. Aereo claims it has installed enough antennas so that there is a physical one available for every single subscriber at any given time, but the lawsuit alleges Aereo's method counts as rebroadcasting and is therefore prohibited by law.

Early on, Aereo won a few rounds against the broadcasters, enabling it to expand to markets beyond New York. But the broadcasters took the case all the way to the Supreme Court, emerging victorious after today's decision.

Essentially, the court did not buy Aereo's argument that it was providing customers with a private performance - via their own antenna - rather than a public performance that required a license.

"These behind-the-scenes technological differences do not distinguish Aereo's system from cable systems, which do perform publicly," the court ruled. "Congress would as much have intended to protect a copyright holder from the unlicensed activities of Aereo as those of cable companies."

The court acknowledged that Aereo does not transmit constantly like a cable company, but "this sole technological difference between Aereo and traditional cable companies does not make a critical difference here."

"When an entity communicates the same contemporaneously perceptible images and sounds to multiple people, it 'transmit[s] ... a performance' to them, irrespective of the number of discrete communications it makes and irrespective of whether it transmits using a single copy of the work, or as Aereo does, using an individual personal copy for each viewer," the decision said. "Moreover, the subscribers to whom Aereo transmits constitute 'the public' under the Act."

In a statement, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) said it "is pleased the Supreme Court has upheld the concept of copyright protection that is enshrined in the Constitution by standing with free and local television."

"Aereo characterized our lawsuit as an attack on innovation; that claim is demonstrably false," NAB said. "Broadcasters embrace innovation every day, as evidenced by our leadership in HDTV, social media, mobile apps, user-generated content, along with network TV backed ventures like Hulu."

"Television broadcasters will always welcome partnerships with companies who respect copyright law. Today's decision sends an unmistakable message that businesses built on the theft of copyrighted material will not be tolerated," the group concluded.

In a separate statement, Aereo CEO and Founder Chet Kanojia said the decision was "a massive setback for the American consumer."

"This sends a chilling message to the technology industry," he continued. "Consumer access to free-to-air broadcast television is an essential part of our country's fabric. Using an antenna to access free-to-air broadcast television is still meaningful for more than 60 million Americans across the United States. And when new technology enables consumers to use a smarter, easier to use antenna, consumers and the marketplace win. Free-to-air broadcast television should not be available only to those who can afford to pay for the cable or satellite bundle."

Kanojia praised Justice Scalia's dissent, which said the majority's opinion is "built on the shakiest of foundations."

"We are disappointed in the outcome, but our work is not done," Kanojia concluded. "We will continue to fight for our consumers and fight to create innovative technologies that have a meaningful and positive impact on our world."

The court, meanwhile, said that it "does not believe its decision will discourage the emergence or use of different kinds of technologies."

Chloe Albanesius has been with PCMag.com since April 2007, most recently as Executive Editor for News and Features. Prior to that, she worked for a year covering financial IT on Wall Street for Incisive Media. From 2002 to 2005, Chloe covered technology policy for The National Journal's Technology Daily in Washington, DC. She has held internships at NBC's Meet the Press, washingtonpost.com, the Tate Gallery press office in London, Roll Call, and Congressional Quarterly. She graduated with a bachelor's degree in journalism from American University...
More »